Audrey Woulard Child Photographer

joescrivens · 28 Oct 2010

DekHog said:
Portrait Professional does it as a matter of course unless you tell it otherwise...

interesting, any portrait pros here confirm or deny?

DekHog · 28 Oct 2010

Just install the trial, Joe - there's sliders for every facial feature you can think of, including eye size, spacing, etc.....

ianbarber · 28 Oct 2010

Thera are a few people asing the same question in her blog "How do you shoot a group of kidas at F1.6 and still maintain sharpness throughout"

The only answe she gives is that "I use a Nikon 85mm 1.4 lens"

I would still like to know how shew achieves this

joescrivens · 28 Oct 2010

DekHog said:
Just install the trial, Joe - there's sliders for every facial feature you can think of, including eye size, spacing, etc.....

whats the software name though?

DekHog · 28 Oct 2010

joescrivens said:
whats the software name though?

Portrait Professional :bonk:

joescrivens · 28 Oct 2010

DekHog said:
Portrait Professional :bonk:

ha, I thought you meant "portrait professionals" and missed the s off like you were saying portrait pros always do this unless asked not too :lol:

DekHog · 28 Oct 2010

joescrivens said:
ha, I thought you meant "portrait professionals" and missed the s off like you were saying portrait pros always do this unless asked not too

Donkey.... :lol:

joescrivens · 28 Oct 2010

ianbarber said:
Thera are a few people asing the same question in her blog "How do you shoot a group of kidas at F1.6 and still maintain sharpness throughout"

The only answe she gives is that "I use a Nikon 85mm 1.4 lens"

I would still like to know how shew achieves this

Well, if she's far enough away theres plenty of DOF at 1.6.

Take this example

http://www.audreywoulardblog.com/images/content/ACF50BC.jpg

I figure the distance between her and the subject is about 10m and she's using an 85mm lens at 1.6.

This gives her a dof 1.31m which is quite a lot and the families face easily falls within about half a meter depth I would imagine.

EDIT

using this calculation and assuming the guy is 6ft or 1.8m and her sensor size is 36mm

Focal Length = 0.75 x Sensor Size x Subject Distance / Subject Size
so 85mm = 0.75 x 36 x d/1.8

distance is 5.6m

giving a dof of 0.41m so still within the real of them all being within that dof for their faces I would say

Richard King · 28 Oct 2010

joescrivens said:
interesting, how does that work then? is it if you use a flash that isn't the brand of the camera or something?

off camera flash using a trigger

simples

Wobbler · 28 Oct 2010

ianbarber said:
Thera are a few people asing the same question in her blog "How do you shoot a group of kidas at F1.6 and still maintain sharpness throughout"

The only answe she gives is that "I use a Nikon 85mm 1.4 lens"

I would still like to know how shew achieves this

LOL! Swerving the question somewhat

tramp92 · 28 Oct 2010

The whites of the eyes appear to be PP. The eyes in general seem to be far too clean for want of a better word. It is these that for me seem to dominate the whole image.

jimmyb · 28 Oct 2010

Love her photographs... Crisp, striking and vivid.

This is the exif I get for one of her images.

Creator: AudreyWoulard___**
Camera: Nikon D700
Lens: 85 mm
Exposure: Manual exposure, 1/320 sec, f/1.6, ISO 4000
Date: November 12, 2009 8:12:36PM
Color Space: sRGB
Software: Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Field Of View: 23.9 deg
File: 689 × 778 JPEG 171,784 bytes (0.16 megabytes) Image compression: 89%

Very high ISO I noticed.... is it common to shoot this high?

DekHog · 28 Oct 2010

I wouldn't say it was common at all to shoot at ISO4000, but to only get 1/320th @ F1.6 there must have been a near total eclipse of the sun at that point......

joescrivens · 29 Oct 2010

Wobbler said:
LOL! Swerving the question somewhat

well what can she say? There is no trickery or anything she just takes the shot from a distance where there is enough dof and aligns them accordningly to get them all sharp, it's just physics really.

She is very clever I think with knowing her dof charts because look at this shot

http://www.audreywoulardblog.com/images/content/ACF50C6.jpg

At first glance you would swear that wasn't at 1.6 but I estimate they are about 4 m away at 85 so the dof is 21cm. The mum and dads eyes are in line with the boy and the baby is within 10cm of their eyes. By the time you get to the dads hand it's starting to drop.

Looking through her sets she just lines them up perfectly

Richard King · 29 Oct 2010

In the main

she is using makeup
she is using reflectors
she appears to be shooting at a reasonable distance, which accounts for the DOF
she is then PP'g the images with a fairly distinctive style
regardless of the background, she is exposing for the subject

BLPhotography · 12 Apr 2011

All we use for newborn photography and shoots is natural light, canon 5D mll, photoshop and a good set of PS actions for colour grading!!

Here's our latest Baby Photography shoot shot in our back room using a backdrop and just the natural light that came through the windows.

Latest Baby Photography Shoot by Joy Foulds - Beautiful Life

Lindsay D · 12 Apr 2011

jeniveeev said:
Hi - i was wondering if anyone can work out this amazing child photographers technique. i have attached the link and if you look in "about me" she explains that 85% of her work is outdoors and natural light without props. I would like to see the exif data on her images to see what settings she uses but cant get it! does anyone have any idea how she produces the creamy skin/popping eyes (not racooned), artistic look? she seems to use prime lenses and various nikon cameras, but her technique looks amazing if no props are used. just curious.

http://www.audreywoulardblog.com/

She uses (excessive) skin smoothing and (excessive) localized sharpening. But that is her brand and style - what makes her work different whether it appeals or not.